Two major practical problems reduce the efficacy of epidural spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for pain control. One is the difficulty of directing the stimulation-induced paresthesia to the desired body part and the other is the problem of disagreeable sensations or motor responses to the stimulation, which reduce the comfortable amplitude range of the stimulation. It is generally agreed that in SCS, for chronic pain, paresthesia should cover the whole pain region. With present stimulation methods and equipment, only highly skilled and experienced practitioners are able to position a stimulation lead in such a way that the desired overlap is reached and desired results (such as deep stimulation) are obtained over time with minimal side effects. It requires much time and effort to focus the stimulation on the desired body region during surgery and, using pulses with single value cathodes, it is difficult to redirect it afterwards, even though some readjustments can be made by selecting a different contact combination, pulse rate, pulse width or voltage.
Redirecting paresthesia after surgery is highly desirable. Even if paresthesia covers the pain area perfectly during surgery, the required paresthesia pattern often changes later due to lead migration, or histological changes (such as the growth of connective tissue around the stimulation electrode) or disease progression. The problem of lead placement has been addressed by U.S. Pat. No. 5,121,754 by the use of a lead with a deformable distal shape. These problems are not only found with SCS, but also with peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS), depth brain stimulation (DBS), cortical stimulation and also muscle or cardiac stimulation.
The era of precise control of electrical fields for excitation of tissue by use of multiple voltages is disclosed in PCT International Publication No. WO 95/19804 (counterpart to Holsheimer et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,501,703) (the “Holsheimer references”). The Holsheimer references describe the use of electrodes that are “in-line,” namely that they are disposed “symmetrically” along a line. The three juxtaposed electrodes have two simultaneous voltages relative to one of them, each with its own amplitude. This approach allows “steering” of the electric fields created by these electrodes. Particularly, the electrical field pattern is adjusted by varying the electrical field generated between those electrodes along that line. The locus of excitation is correspondingly varied with that variation in the electrical field pattern. For example, if a central electrode of three roughly collinear electrodes is a cathode (−) then the outer anodes push the areas of excitation toward the middle, and shield outer areas from excitation. As the anodal pulses are varied in amplitude, the field steers toward the outside.
However, the Holsheimer references disclose a system that requires three electrodes that are optimally spaced symmetrically along a line. It is a serious handicap during the surgical procedure to place these electrodes in the body. Often, a lead such as a paddle is used for mounting the multiple electrodes in the optimally spaced positions. This lead is then inserted within a patient near the tissue to be excited, and electrical excitation is applied to the lead. Unfortunately, placement of a lead such as the paddle within a patient, can be difficult since the paddle can be surgically difficult to manipulate adjacent the spinal cord. Thus, it would be desirable to be able to adjust the locus of excitation in electrically excitable tissue without the use of optimally spaced electrodes.
In addition, the Holsheimer system is limited in that steering is accomplished over a linear path. It would be desirable to adjust the locus of excitation in electrically excitable tissue over a greater area.